[SpecialK]

I'll probably still use the 5D for weddings because the auto focus is significantly faster. I really hope Pentax is able to improve that with a firmware update, it's an issue.

The K-1 is greatly improved in AF (so I have read). Welcome to Pentaxland.

[automorphism]

Did you cut and paste all the settings? I don't know which program you use but on some programs that will actually also paste the base curve as well, which will mess up the Raw file with the mismatched curve.

Even if not, a fair real-world test would be to develop both Raw files to the best of your ability, rather than taking pretty much the default on both with a little sharpening and noise reduction. Not all defaults are created equal.

[fromunderthebridge]

Also, what some other have said. A good test of the IQ would be to take the test shots with comparable settings (as you have done), then match the exposure and then compare the IQ. Then you will actually see what goes into the 'sausage' including noise characteristics, detail and DR. This also eliminates the differences due to ISO measurement differences etc. I think it has been mentioned on other threads, but ISO is actually a manufacturer self reported measure and the standard specifies multiple different ways of measuring sensitivity and as such ISO numbers between cameras may or may not be comparable.

[SamuelDixon]

Did you cut and paste all the settings? I don't know which program you use but on some programs that will actually also paste the base curve as well, which will mess up the Raw file with the mismatched curve.

Even if not, a fair real-world test would be to develop both Raw files to the best of your ability, rather than taking pretty much the default on both with a little sharpening and noise reduction. Not all defaults are created equal.

I used the most up to date version of Lightroom. Cut and paste settings.

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 06:52 AM ----------

The 77mm has beautiful rendition for portraiture in my opinion. It uses screwdrive AF so that may be a downside depending on use. The coatings (?) may also be a tad old compared to newer Ricoh releases.

Again though, if you don't require lightning fast AF, the rendition on FF is really sweet...

EDIT:
Have to admit I have no experience on the sigma 85mm though...

Slower autofocus huh? Yikes, that's already kind of an issue...

[mee]

Your photography seems to be very high-key with a washed out, old timey look. The Canon FF sensors tend to fair better on the brighter side while the Pentax (Sony Sensors) tend to fair better on the darker side (with shadows).

That is, the Canon FF sensors seem to be geared at providing less DR at lower ISO speeds but better DR at high ISO in comparison to the Sony sensored products (and most definitely the Pentaxes which give you much more DR at low ISO). I think you can pull down overexposed sections better with the Canons but can push shadow detail far better on the Pentaxes. It might be down just to learning how to work with the different sensor.

btw your GPS was enabled in the EXIF haha.. you live in an interesting place :c )

[automorphism]

I used the most up to date version of Lightroom. Cut and paste settings.

Ok, so can you verify whether you pasted the base curve? I don't know how Lightroom works in this regard as I don't use it.

[vladfrenkel]

Can you actually post those DNG files somewhere? C1 for example has "linear curve" ability, would be interesting to see what it shows as far as no changes to RAW...

[SamuelDixon]

Ok, so can you verify whether you pasted the base curve? I don't know how Lightroom works in this regard as I don't use it.

The RGB curve is flat in both. I also used "Adobe Standard" for the camera profile for both. TBH I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "base curve"...

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 07:27 AM ----------

Your photography seems to be very high-key with a washed out, old timey look. The Canon FF sensors tend to fair better on the brighter side while the Pentax (Sony Sensors) tend to fair better on the darker side (with shadows).

That is, the Canon FF sensors seem to be geared at providing less DR at lower ISO speeds but better DR at high ISO in comparison to the Sony sensored products (and most definitely the Pentaxes which give you much more DR at low ISO). I think you can pull down overexposed sections better with the Canons but can push shadow detail far better on the Pentaxes. It might be down just to learning how to work with the different sensor.

btw your GPS was enabled in the EXIF haha.. you live in an interesting place :c )

Haha I'm guessing you found my website, most of that stuff is older, I'm trying to get away from that heavy handed processing.

I suppose I shouldn't share my gps data haha. Yeah DC is a weird effing town...

I'll do another test tomorrow in better light.

[Imp]

Another person in DC!

[CarlJF]

I used the most up to date version of Lightroom. Cut and paste settings.[COLOR="Silver"]

It could be the camera profile. I don't know what LR used by default with Canon camera, but with Pentax it will be Adobe Standard, which is somewhat dull. Just use the embedded profile and it should look better, but still not overly saturated, somewhat like the "faithful" Canon profile.

[SamuelDixon]

It could be the camera profile. I don't know what LR used by default with Canon camera, but with Pentax it will be Adobe Standard, which is somewhat dull. Just use the embedded profile and it should look better, but still not overly saturated, somewhat like the "faithful" Canon profile.

I used "Adobe Standard" for both.

[micromacro]

The second thing is how much more saturated the canon image is, the colors just look better in general.

I'm not an expert, but from what I noticed Pentax colors are usually more saturated than Canon. Perhaps, it depends on lens, Sigma primes on Pentax tend to be less saturated than Pentax lenses.

Friend of mine has your model camera as well, and yes, when we shoot together, her images always seem brighter than mine. And yes, to match her "style" I need more ++ in exposure compensation than she needs.
I guess you give K-1 more chances before selling it. What I love about Pentax in general, is more "dimensional" look.
It depends on what you prefer, I guess.
There is no perfect camera brand in the world.

[northcoastgreg]

Sure they are both under exposed but all things being equal (which they are, identical lens/exposure/settings in lightroom) I would expect the K1 to blow the 5Dii out of the water.

Those are unrealistic expectations, particularly at ISO 1600. The main advantage of the K-1 will be at low ISOs, where K-1 files will have more DR. But you're not going to see that DR when looking at unprocessed RAW files. You can only appreciated the added DR after you've brought up the shadows in Lightroom. Even then, files with larger DR often require more processing, as bringing up shadows can lessen both contrast and saturation.

The second thing is how much more saturated the canon image is, the colors just look better in general.

Given that we have underexposed and unprocessed RAW files, that doesn't mean a whole lot (changing exposure and contrast in Lightroom may be all you need to "fix" the K-1 file). Furthermore, it should be kept in mind that Pentax cameras are finely tuned to produce a specific color style when shot with Pentax lenses. I would assume Canon does the same thing. However, the color styles of the two companies are different, with Pentax looking for a more aesthetic look, particularly with blues and greens (which tends to work out really well with landscapes), and Canon going for a more neutral look (which tends to be favored by event photographers). With Sigma glass, you're going to get different results, color-wise, on each platform, as Sigma lenses cannot be expected to render color exactly like Pentax or Canon glass. Color profiling may be required to even things out.

[SamuelDixon]

I'm not an expert, but from what I noticed Pentax colors are usually more saturated than Canon. Perhaps, it depends on lens, Sigma primes on Pentax tend to be less saturated than Pentax lenses.

Friend of mine has your model camera as well, and yes, when we shoot together, her images always seem brighter than mine. And yes, to match her "style" I need more ++ in exposure compensation than she needs.
I guess you give K-1 more chances before selling it. What I love about Pentax in general, is more "dimensional" look.
It depends on what you prefer, I guess.
There is no perfect camera brand in the world.

Yeah I'm definitely going to stick with the K1 for a few months, it's certainly not perfect but as someone mentioned earlier no camera is. I'm really looking forward to using it and the 15mm to 30mm 2.8 while I visit Iceland in September. I'm sure I'll get used to it and figure out a good workflow in post for these K1 files.

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 09:46 AM ----------

Those are unrealistic expectations, particularly at ISO 1600. The main advantage of the K-1 will be at low ISOs, where K-1 files will have more DR. But you're not going to see that DR when looking at unprocessed RAW files. You can only appreciated the added DR after you've brought up the shadows in Lightroom. Even then, files with larger DR often require more processing, as bringing up shadows can lessen both contrast and saturation.



Given that we have underexposed and unprocessed RAW files, that doesn't mean a whole lot (changing exposure and contrast in Lightroom may be all you need to "fix" the K-1 file). Furthermore, it should be kept in mind that Pentax cameras are finely tuned to produce a specific color style when shot with Pentax lenses. I would assume Canon does the same thing. However, the color styles of the two companies are different, with Pentax looking for a more aesthetic look, particularly with blues and greens (which tends to work out really well with landscapes), and Canon going for a more neutral look (which tends to be favored by event photographers). With Sigma glass, you're going to get different results, color-wise, on each platform, as Sigma lenses cannot be expected to render color exactly like Pentax or Canon glass. Color profiling may be required to even things out.

The shots I posted were processed JPEGS. When I test again I'll post the raw files somewhere for people to check out.

Now I'm wondering how these sites like DPReview etc who do those side by side comparisons compensate for the different sensitivity levels at an identical iso between different manufacturers.

[house]

Adobe default applies camera specific basecurves if I'm correctly informed. A base curve brings the raw data into a reasonable viewable range.